PANDEMIC: ADJUSTING SOCIAL WORK PRACTIUM. AN ISOLATED INDICENT OR AN ENTRY TO A LARGER DISCUSSION?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On March 13, 2020, Mount Royal University responded to the pandemic declaration of the World Health Organization (WHO) and local health directives by stopping all face-to-face learning, including practicums. This sudden cessation was done for reasons of safety and liability. Rapid shifts were required, presenting functional, ethical, and privacy challenges for students and faculty who recognized that practicums are vital for social work students preparing to enter practice. Using a theoretical framework of compounding complexity, the paper considers eight key learnings from the authors’ experiences managing a social work practicum program, contemplating implications for current and future crisis-oriented fieldwork. This paper goes further to challenge a re-evaluation of social work as a result of the pandemic, social movements including the Black Lives Matter movement, as well as the changing socio-economic factors that influence service users’ lives. These conversations have emerged within the pandemic context and afford a moment to reflect on the place and role of social work.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".